Apple and Microsoft being sued for not using enough DRM

Dominus Atheos · Post by **Dominus Atheos** » 2007-05-11 06:06pm

Microsoft Corp and Apple Inc could face a possible lawsuit for failing to include measures to control access to copyrighted material in products such as Vista OS, iTunes and the iPod, two companies have warned.

Media Rights Technologies (MRT) and BlueBeat.com have issued cease and desist letters to both companies and to Adobe Systems Inc (nasdaq: ADBE - news - people ) and Real Networks -- which produce the Adobe Flash Player and Real Player respectively -- for actively avoiding their X1 SeCure Recording Control, which they said is an effective copyright protection system.

MRT and Bluebeat said the failure to use an available copyright protection solution contravenes the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which prohibits the manufacture of any product or technology designed to circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a copyrighted work or protects the rights of copyright owners.

They said a failure to comply with the cease and desist order could result in in a federal court injunction and/or the imposition of statutory damages of 200-2,500 usd per product distributed or sold.

Rightous Fist Of Heaven · Post by **Rightous Fist Of Heaven** » 2007-05-11 07:01pm

Watching this unravel should be hilarious.

DarkSilver · Post by **DarkSilver** » 2007-05-11 07:28pm

Unfortunately, this frivolous (as i see it) lawsuit may have some footing....apparently MRT went to Microsoft, Real Media, Adobe, and the others with their X1 tech, and they were "blown off". (as stated from this article).

And according to Hank Risan (CEO of MRT and perpetrator of the lawsuit) at his own blog, Microsoft and others are doing this all purposely, even going so far as microsoft building their own native stream ripper into Vista! (He's, of course, referring to Sound Recorder, which has been in every version of Windows I'm aware of since 3.1.....).

He's expecting to sue collectively, for no approximatly than 200 billion....and I can see him somehow obtaining a small amount of this number. But come on...suing for NOT using their tech?

What will we see next?

Shogoki · Post by **Shogoki** » 2007-05-11 07:32pm

I hope this opens the floodgates for entrepreneurs suing costumers for not complying with their demand needs. Set up shop in the US and then SUE potential costumers for profit, the american dream!

bilateralrope · Post by **bilateralrope** » 2007-05-11 08:14pm

So their lawsuit is based on the assumption that their DRM works, therefore anyone who isn't using it is encouraging copyright infringement because they either have a broken DRM or no DRM.

If the people who can crack it hadn't noticed it yet, they have now. It will be interesting to see how they react when a crack for it is introduced as evidence.

Arthur_Tuxedo · Post by **Arthur_Tuxedo** » 2007-05-11 10:01pm

Hopefully this will raise awareness about what the DMCA contains and lead to its repeal. Hell, I hope they win. That would really raise awareness about it.

Davis 51 · Post by **Davis 51** » 2007-05-11 10:03pm

This reminds me of a lawsuit where Diebold sued a state because they didn't use their voting machines.

DarkSilver · Post by **DarkSilver** » 2007-05-11 10:48pm

Well, the entire thing is their DRM is supposed to stop you from ripping a audiostream from a website, thus stopping copyright infringement of the copyrighted material. He goes so far to even say that it's possible to go back onto sites like CNN news and Youtube, both who use software which have their "stream ripping" loophole as built in by the manufacturers.

So basically....their DRM stops you from starting up a separate audio recording program, and hitting record...

Yes, That is EXACTLY what their DRM is supposed to stop you from doing, somehow destroying the accompanying file that is outputted by the program.

I want to know what DRM, exactly, is that supposed to be, and how soon before we see one of the RIAA trying to hide it onto hybrid audio CD's.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2007-05-12 12:03am

So Microsoft, Apple and Adobe versus ... Media Rights Technologies.

Gee, wonder who'll win this one.

Fingolfin_Noldor · Post by **Fingolfin_Noldor** » 2007-05-12 12:58am

Durandal wrote:So Microsoft, Apple and Adobe versus ... Media Rights Technologies.

Gee, wonder who'll win this one.

Or rather, who will run out of money first.

ray245 · Post by **ray245** » 2007-05-12 04:01am

How rich is Media Rights Technologies anyway?

Post by **haas mark** » 2007-05-12 07:33am

ray245 wrote:How rich is Media Rights Technologies anyway?

Not enough, gathering from the companies they're attempting to sue.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2007-05-12 10:46am

haas mark wrote:
ray245 wrote:How rich is Media Rights Technologies anyway?
Not enough, gathering from the companies they're attempting to sue.

The only company's that can out money Microsoft are industry giants. And I mean true giants. For example Microsoft VS Exxon or McDonald's might be a fair money fight, but short of the top twenty of the F500 companys there's very few company's who can out money MS.

PeZook · Post by **PeZook** » 2007-05-12 11:20am

Can I sue customers who don't buy my hamburgers, too?
Or...I know! I'll start a security company and sue people for not using my services, arguing they're endangering lives of their customers! Brilliant!

The Dark · Post by **The Dark** » 2007-05-12 11:42am

Mr Bean wrote:
haas mark wrote:
ray245 wrote:How rich is Media Rights Technologies anyway?
Not enough, gathering from the companies they're attempting to sue.
The only company's that can out money Microsoft are industry giants. And I mean true giants. For example Microsoft VS Exxon or McDonald's might be a fair money fight, but short of the top twenty of the F500 companys there's very few company's who can out money MS.

To be a bit more specific, Microsoft's #49 on the Fortune 500. And some of the companies above them aren't terribly healthy (GM and Ford). Unless you're a Wal-Mart, a Boeing, or one of the big financial institutions (Citigroup, Bank of America, Wachovia), you can't out-money Microsoft.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2007-05-12 03:00pm

Mr Bean wrote: The only company's that can out money Microsoft are industry giants. And I mean true giants. For example Microsoft VS Exxon or McDonald's might be a fair money fight, but short of the top twenty of the F500 companys there's very few company's who can out money MS.

Or the EU. You so much as sneeze the wrong way, and the EU will take you to court on anti-trust.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2007-05-12 03:04pm

The Dark wrote:
Mr Bean wrote:
haas mark wrote: Not enough, gathering from the companies they're attempting to sue.
The only company's that can out money Microsoft are industry giants. And I mean true giants. For example Microsoft VS Exxon or McDonald's might be a fair money fight, but short of the top twenty of the F500 companys there's very few company's who can out money MS.
To be a bit more specific, Microsoft's #49 on the Fortune 500. And some of the companies above them aren't terribly healthy (GM and Ford). Unless you're a Wal-Mart, a Boeing, or one of the big financial institutions (Citigroup, Bank of America, Wachovia), you can't out-money Microsoft.

I'm surprised that Walgreens and fucking Dell are actually higher up in the food-chain than Microsoft on that list. . .

Vendetta · Post by **Vendetta** » 2007-05-12 03:15pm

General Zod wrote: I'm surprised that Walgreens and fucking Dell are actually higher up in the food-chain than Microsoft on that list. . .

That's because it's done by gross revenue, not profit. Companies that sell high price items in bulk can easily have a higher operating income than Microsoft, which sells a lot of it's volume in discount bulk to OEM builders.

Listed according to operating profit, Microsoft would be bubbling around the bottom of the top ten.

bilateralrope · Post by **bilateralrope** » 2007-05-12 05:54pm

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:
Durandal wrote:So Microsoft, Apple and Adobe versus ... Media Rights Technologies.

Gee, wonder who'll win this one.
Or rather, who will run out of money first.

Unfortunately in many lawsuits in the US its cheaper, per lawsuit, to settle it than to fight it even if your completely in the right. So I won't be surprised to see this settled.

Lisa · Post by **Lisa** » 2007-05-12 05:57pm

bilateralrope wrote:
Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:
Durandal wrote:So Microsoft, Apple and Adobe versus ... Media Rights Technologies.

Gee, wonder who'll win this one.
Or rather, who will run out of money first.
Unfortunately in many lawsuits in the US its cheaper, per lawsuit, to settle it than to fight it even if your completely in the right. So I won't be surprised to see this settled.

They should audit for legit copies of software...

bilateralrope · Post by **bilateralrope** » 2007-05-12 06:46pm

Though it seems that they haven't been sued yet, just sent cease and desist letters.

blog link

No. Apple et al Were Not Sued and Slashdot Sucks

Update: More from Ars.

Another day, another screwed up headline on Slashdot.

No lawsuit was filed. This was merely a publicity stunt by Media Rights Technologies (who doesn't deserve a link), and the only action taken were cease and desist letters that were sent but are simply not going to be enforced.

Shame on Forbes and their supposed "journalism" for being unable to tell the difference between a serious legal threat and a publicity stunt, and shame on the Slashdot editors for being too lazy to read the linked articles before accepting submissions.

Ars Technica article linked to in the blog post. It only mentions the cease and desist letters and the threat of a lawsuit.

Not that I'm ruling out a lawsuit when they ignore the cease and desist letters, but they haven't sued yet.

Lisa wrote:They should audit for legit copies of software...

Even if Microsoft only finds fully compliant copies of MS software, doesn't M&T have a obligation to reduce the harm to themselves. ?
Such as by not using infringing products, which by their own arguments include all operating systems.

Chris OFarrell · Post by **Chris OFarrell** » 2007-05-12 07:18pm

Good.
Hopefully they'll sue, Apple, Microsoft and Adobe will put together a team of lawyers that would make Satan run for the hills and absolutely destroy DRM.
Everyone is happy.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2007-05-12 08:36pm

So what do their cease and desists say? "We demand that you cease and desist not using our products!"?

Arthur_Tuxedo · Post by **Arthur_Tuxedo** » 2007-05-12 08:44pm

Yeah, it's kind of the opposite of "cease and desist" when you think about it.

Phantasee · Post by **Phantasee** » 2007-05-12 11:46pm

This is the dumbest publicity stunt I've ever heard of. And Slashdot and Forbes are dumb for confusing 'cease and desist' with 'sue.' Altough, that doesn't really matter, since the cease and desist is more like a 'start and continue.'

This ties with the story about the ghost company running under the NEC banner in China for sheer audacity, though.